Mental Hardware

Frequency/Time

“It is interesting to note that there is something in our head that knows how to walk, while we are not consciously aware of it. It is sobering to recognize that there is something in our head that that understands chaotic theory in 13 dimensions, AND CAN MANIPULATE IT, real time.” – el Loco Gringo

“So far all the discussion of sound has centered on its description as fluctuations in air pressure over time. The representation of sound in the time domain is important to understand, but in some ways it is also awkward. For instance, the frequency of a sound is one of its most important physical properties, but determining frequency from a waveform requires making measurements of time intervals and then doing arithmetic. Indeed, for many complex waveforms, where multiple sinusoids of various frequencies are simultaneously present, it is often unclear where the intervals to be measured begin and end. The frequency domain provides an alternative description of sound in which the time axis is replaced by a frequency axis. In the frequency domain, sounds are represented in a frequency by amplitude and/or phase diagram. “ – ASEL

“It’s only complicated if you’re thinking backwards” – el Loco Gringo

Do not go wobbly on me here. Do not allow your mind to boggle. Uncle Walter will make it all better. It is the concept which is important not the math. Indeed the math is irrelevant.

Top down thinking assumes that the time domain is reality and the frequency domain is imaginary. As there is much more information to be gained in the frequency domain it is easier to convert the time domain to the frequency domain, get the answer, (in the frequency domain the answer “just is”) and then convert it back. However, this logic tree is fallacious.

Bottom up thinking shows that the frequency domain is reality and the time domain is imaginary. Indeed, a mathematician capable of thinking in the frequency domain (should such a person be possible) might well wonder why in the world would anyone be interested in so limited a concept as an imaginary “time”. (As I wonder why people are so dumb) The reason of course is that in the time domain information can be categorized. Looking at the header time>frequency>time the calculations cancel out and we are left with frequency IE Reality. In fact, the concept of math is, in and of itself, an artifact, a method of categorizing, quantifying, putting things in baskets.

In fact, EVERYTHING we perceive is only an interpretation of what we see. The shadows Plato was talking about.

Sometimes when we can’t make sense out of something we assume that we are dumb. We do not think of the possibility that perhaps there is no sense there. This should set off a flag, but it doesn’t.

NOW is the time to set the algorithm. The “goal” you were looking for in your logic tree. NOW is the time to use top down thinking. NOW you can start with “The frequency domain is reality” and work downwards to see what that implies. (And the implications are staggering) NOW you can put things in baskets. NOW you can quantify, sort, collate, dissect and mangle the data. NOW you can use the scientific method. (not just yet tho)

As profound as this is, the concept of the ANN is profounder.

“A world of beautiful, loving, compassionate people” – Jill Bolte Taylor

That is my gift to humanity – el Loco Gringo

Negentropy1 Negentropy2 Negentropy3 Dogma Time/Freq RideOnTheWildSide Vibroseis Visualizations TimeTranslator Spectrum Great Mysterious MRI’s

Reindeer

Reindeer

Sigh!

You are missing the points. (there are two) As far as I can see the last person to understand the nature of the universe was Plato. There is not one tip of the iceberg but two seperate and discinct tips of two seperate and distinct icebergs. I’ll try another analogy, (I’ve lost count how many that is) we’ll keep this with scientists studying reindeer herders. In the west the scientists use digital (top down)computers to analyze the movements of said reindeer herders. In russia they use analog (bottom up) computers to analyze the same. The more focused the view the closer these results compare but the more difuse the view the more these results diverge. As long as we remain within the narrow window we evolved to perceive the world through, the results are fairly consistant, or at least not inconsistant. Neither result is right, neither is wrong. To obtain the optimum result, however, the results must be compared, and discrepancies understood. The problem, Mr Ted is not which view is right, but which is less wrong in regard the particular problem being analyzed. “If we apply the top down result what does the bottom up result tell us about what will happen?” The western approach will kill off the herd, the russian approach will starve the nenet”? The nenete approach works. The Russians think the west is wrong, the west thinks the russians are wrong. But what neither realizes is that they are both wrong. The reindeer herders behave as they do because the results of the two computers they are using (inside the skull) give consistent results when they behave as they do. you are de-bugging the wetware (taking things apart, differentiating whatever) trying to figure it out, whereas the reindeer herders are differentiating AND integrating, comparing the results and acting accordingly. Non-adherants to dogma are called heretics, by the way.

The right mind is basically a data accumulation correlation device, (inclusionary) while the left mind is primarily a data discarding analysis mechanism (exclusionary) so you’re right . The scientific method can’t prove shit, it can only disprove something.

Protected: Kirby 9/18/10

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Password:

Downloads

This post will be continually updated with downloadable files, check back often

GabrielLafrenierMatterIsMadeOfWaves NolanGasserMiracleMusic Time Pugnacious

Who’s crazy now?

This is a new category highlighting what I consider to be seminal concepts defining reality. The first is an exchange between Emile and Anon. Anon uses the standard block of idiots of dismissing something they don’t understand by sprinkling “pixie dust” on the argument claiming the antogonist is obviously crazy or ill informed. The use of the word “obvious” is a pretty surefire way to identify an idiot, having no place in inquiry. NOTHING should be obvious. Please do not dismiss what I’m saying by using shortcut thinking. Not only did Emile cage the cat, he put lipstick on it. If you don’t understand what is being said, maybe you should switch from cosmology to cosmetology.

cosmetology Paradigms Eggzactly SpankingAnon Squee Space&Motion Calculus Sanity Aha! Chi HerdingCats

Holes

“If you can’t see it, it isn’t real” – Aristotelian Brain Fart

Maybe if I use itty bitty words, and teeny weeny ideas in real short sentences and some pretty pictures I can convey this concept within your 8 second attention span. This is high school shit people.

Conventional wisdom that electron movement causes electro-magnetic waves is

In reality the electro-magnetic waves cause electron movement. Everybody knows this. Nobody understands this. Your brain is running in reverse. The plane is flying backwards. Reverse the pitch of the prop.

The universe is of a wave nature. period. end of story.

The top graphic shows conventional wisdom.

The bottom graphic shows reality.

Holes Redux

What you see

SVP

Call of the cosmos A new science paradigm SVP

http://www.svpvril.com/Cosmology/cos7.html

Subset

What we perceive of reality is a sub-set of forming patterns in the right mind in the frequency domain. The is interpreted in the left mind by a process equivalent to the Fourier transform in the time domain, (the output is quantified, a dimension is thrown away and time, color and sound are added) If this data is reintegrated what is left is less than reality by itself, since it is quantified it is less than what we originally perceived, and even less than reality. This re-integration is confused for reality in physics (and all observations). It is what I call the Aristotelean brain fart, a built in logic flaw in the brain, which leads to such silliness as parallel universes, quantum mechanics. In physics all physicists know that the universe is of a wave nature, but do not understand it, and continue to act as if the universe was of a particle nature. In addition, integral calculus IS bottom up thinking as applied to a cartesian model and differential calculus IS top down thinking as applied to a cartesian model. BUT the universe ain’t cartesian. Newton used god to balance the equations. Modern science, Eschewing god, uses quarks, parallel universes, multi dimensions to balance the equations. Ted Lumley posed the question “does the universe make electrons or do electrons make the universe?” setting aside for the moment that electron is an invalid concept for what is a wave (whorl, node, unfolding in the now?) sorry, there are no words for this. the answer is yes. so at one end of the Physics tunnel we are looking through end points are set by our inability to contain the entirety inside the skull. one endpoint is quantum mechanics, the other is parallel universes. my feeling is the two are just two different perspectives, results of the Aristotelean brain fart. I think i said this better in a comment which I posted. just a minute. Ah found it thanks for waiting. the topic of the thread was actually duality but the minds work the same way no matter what question is posed, that just depends on what tunnel you’re looking through, and what wetware you’ve been imprinted with.

http://ellocogringo.wordpress.com/2010/07/01/the-circle-jerk/

Please note I am not talking about physics per se, but how the mind distorts how we think about physics. I prefer to leave physics and math to those who are interested in such things. But whatever we look at the whole is less than the WHOLE. To complete the thought, no yoga devotee is confused by the two slot problem but is baffled by the scientific method, which he views as circular reasoning. IE start with the answer and differentiate it to reach the question. If you’re going to build a bridge calculus is perfectly acceptable. If you are trying to determine the nature of the universe it is inadequate. Vector math MAY give a better answer, dunno, I’m not a mathematician. but it will still not be WHOLE.

the brain is the instrument we use to observe the universe and what is happening inside the skull must be taken into account.

AHA!

eLG has a thought

Consider

“I understand your reservations with regard to the Forester quote – and I think that your concerns are valid.  However, I also “trust” that if you read it with an open heart, you can find a lot to like about it as well.” – john

Yup, that’s that exclusiory/parallel mode I was talking about. A western person with an uncrippled brain muses (bottom up) in terms of an additive boolean network, IE with a,b,c as input the output can be either x or y or z. Mr Ted muses (parallel) in terms of a subtractive boolean network with inputs of a,b,c it can yield outputs of Neither x nor y nor z. On the other hand a western person thinks (top down) in terms of either a or b. Mr ted thinks (serial) in terms of x and y and z. the seeming confusion has more to do with the way the question is posed, and not the way it is answered.

As to the rest of this stuff. You all make noises about the limitations of the Aristotelian/Euclidean/Cartesian world view then IMMEDIATELY let a brain fart and slide back into the yin/yang wars. Please try to hold on to that intuition for more than a few seconds. You’re not talking about the nature of the world, you’re talking about thinking about the nature of the world. Mr ted has almost got it, and the rest of have almost got mr ted. And I despair, silent scream.

Aha! The human mind has an attention span of 8 seconds before it slides back into top down thinking. If you don’t nail a concept down in 8 seconds it’s gone. A new lexicon may work but would be cumbersome. Maybe a way to keep reminding us to focus our attention on the illusory nature of what we perceive. Perhaps a prefix to a Cartesian perception or a Aristotelian concept or a euclidean interpretation.  Mr Ted doesn’t have this problem. How odd.

Something like ►time to be read as null time means “what we perceive as time” is ?

or ►dimension to be read as null dimension means “what we interpret as dimension” is ?

or ►particles to be read as null particles means “what we think of as particles” is ?

ĀMath vector math, null a math, non aristotelian math

this may jar the thinking back to the question at hand.

I feel this issue goes past the immediate concerns and may affect the survival of the species.

walt

Trifecta

using plato’s model
1) reality (ether)
2) what we see of reality (shadows)
3) what we think of what we see  (mythos, logos)

1 is indeterminate

2 is perceived in the frequency domain and interpreted in the time domain. neither is reality

3 the perception is evaluated boolean, the interpretation is evaluated binary

“……..postulate the existence of a new form of matter, ether”  (Space/Time continuum)

As far as I can tell, I’m the only person who understands what Plato was saying.  He did pretty good when you consider that all he had to work with was earth, wind, fire and water.  But then he didn’t have his mind screwed up with the Aristotelian Brain Fart.  (A degree from MIT) Operating on the engineering level rather than the scientific level.  Fine for building bridges, but sucks for scientific enquiry.  Shadows Duality Einstein

The word is not the concept

Paradigms

Just to put this in perspective. Inclusional People capable of understanding Emile in the A or B or C mode is .047% of the population. People capable of understanding Emile in the AB or AC or BC mode is 20% of the population. The rest are idiots. (used in the clinical sense)

Time/Frequency domain

We have two cognitive minds each with it’s own logical and perceptual processing, synchronous and modulated by intensity. (weighting)” – el Loco Gringo

“It is interesting to note that there is something in our head that knows how to walk, while we are not consciously aware of it. It is sobering to recognize that there is something in our head that that understands chaotic theory in 13 dimensions, AND CAN MANIPULATE IT, real time.” – el Loco Gringo

“So far all the discussion of sound has centered on its description as fluctuations in air pressure over time. The representation of sound in the time domain is important to understand, but in some ways it is also awkward. For instance, the frequency of a sound is one of its most important physical properties, but determining frequency from a waveform requires making measurements of time intervals and then doing arithmetic. Indeed, for many complex waveforms, where multiple sinusoids of various frequencies are simultaneously present, it is often unclear where the intervals to be measured begin and end. The frequency domain provides an alternative description of sound in which the time axis is replaced by a frequency axis. In the frequency domain, sounds are represented in a frequency by amplitude and/or phase diagram. “ – ASEL

“It’s only complicated if you’re thinking backwards” – el Loco Gringo

Do not go wobbly on me here. Do not allow your mind to boggle. Uncle Walter will make it all better. It is the concept which is important not the math. Indeed the math is irrelevant.

Top down thinking assumes that the time domain is reality and the frequency domain is imaginary. As there is much more information to be gained in the frequency domain it is easier to convert the time domain to the frequency domain, get the answer, (in the frequency domain the answer “just is”) and then convert it back. However, this logic tree is fallacious.

Bottom up thinking shows that the frequency domain is reality and the time domain is imaginary. Indeed, a mathematician capable of thinking in the frequency domain (should such a person be possible) might well wonder why in the world would anyone be interested in so limited a concept as an imaginary “time”. (As I wonder why people are so dumb) The reason of course is that in the time domain information can be categorized. Looking at the header time>frequency>time the calculations cancel out and we are left with frequency IE Reality. In fact, the concept of math is, in and of itself, an artifact, a method of categorizing, quantifying, putting things in baskets.

In fact, EVERYTHING we perceive is only an interpretation of what we see. The shadows Plato was talking about.

Sometimes when we can’t make sense out of something we assume that we are dumb. We do not think of the possibility that perhaps there is no sense there. This should set off a flag, but it doesn’t.

NOW is the time to set the algorithm. The “goal” you were looking for in your logic tree. NOW is the time to use top down thinking. NOW you can start with “The frequency domain is reality” and work downwards to see what that implies. (And the implications are staggering) NOW you can put things in baskets. NOW you can quantify, sort, collate, dissect and mangle the data. NOW you can use the scientific method. (not just yet tho)

As profound as this is, the concept of the ANN is profounder.

“A world of beautiful, loving, compassionate people” – Jill Bolte Taylor

That is my gift to humanity – el Loco Gringo

Time/Freq RideOnTheWildSide Vibroseis Visualizations TimeTranslator Spectrum Emergence Geophysics Nostalgia Great Mysterious

Lisi’s TOE

“In spite of having successfully used analysis (i.e. “taking things apart”) as a powerful tool for centuries, science is converging on the nondual. Cosmologists seek a first cause for the universe. Physicists look for the ultimate constituent of matter. Neurophysiologists attempt to correlate physiological observables with reported experiences of nonduality. Transpersonal psychologists investigate the effects of these experiences on human mental health. Deep ecologists explore the potential consequences of nondual understanding on long term global health. Mathematics practiced with love and devotion has been described as communion with the nondual Divine.” – SAND

Check this out, this is the pre-print for Lisi’s paper. I’ve read it and the logic and data seems valid, but it doesn’t “feel right” somehow. It does hold together and is not inconsistent. (that’s annoying) The flaw of course is his use of dimension (particularly 4th) The fact that it was largely ignored by mainstream physics adds further credibility in my mind. I’d say he was one step up from Plato. Notice he eschews calculus, as did Mr Milo and Mr Geoff.

also annoying was a person explaining evolution in hydraulic terms.

http://arxiv.org/abs/0711.0770?context=hep-th

“An Exceptionally Simple Theory of Everything is a preprint proposing a basis for a unified field theory, which attempts to describe all known fundamental interactions in physics, and to stand as a possible theory of everything. The preprint was posted to the physics arXiv by Antony Garrett Lisi in November 2007,[1] and was not submitted to a peer-reviewed scientific journal.[2] The title is a pun on the algebra used, the Lie algebra of the largest “simple,” “exceptional” Lie group, E8.

Lie groups

[show]Classical groups
[show]Simple Lie groups
[show]Other Lie groups
[show]Lie algebras
[show]Structure of semi-simple Lie groups
[show]Representation theory
[show]Lie groups in Physics
v • d • e
The theory “received accolades from a few physicists amid a flurry of media coverage,” but also “widespread skepticism.”[3] Scientific American reported in March 2008 that the theory was being “largely but not entirely ignored” by the mainstream physics community, with a few physicists picking up the work to develop it further.[4] In a critical paper[5] published in Communications in Mathematical Physics, Jacques Distler and Skip Garibaldi state that Lisi’s theory, and a large class of related models, cannot work.

As of May 2008 Lisi’s preprint was the most downloaded article in the arXiv.[6]” – wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Exceptionally_Simple_Theory_of_Everything

The tao TOE

“Occidentals seek insight, orientals seek outsight” – el Loco Gringo

“We have two cognitive minds each with it’s own logical and perceptual processing, synchronous and modulated by intensity.” – el Loco Gringo

1.Axon level.  there are two ways of experiencing the world, frequency domain (yin, perception, right mind) and time domain (yang, interpretation, left mind)2 Dendrite level And there are two ways of thinking about this experience boolean/parallel (yin, mythos, right mind)  binary/serial (yang, logos, left mind)

3 none of this is reality (tao, ether, universe), but only our perception (squishy) and interpretation (squishy) of reality (ether) which some people call god, one mind, big hoochie koochie, space/time continuum, whatever.

4 Modulated by the reticulator, (aggregate and accumulate)

5 Switched by the amygdala

any model of reality that does not take these 5 elements into account is flawed.…...

Here’s a yin/yang mobile of what’s happening,  Plug in whatever duality words you prefer depending on your worldview.  Tao (in this case) doesn’t really care about what the yin and yang “think”  it is up to the yin and yang to work together to achieve feng shui (optimize qi)  Yeah I know it doesn’t adhere to oriental dogma, but they have the Taoist brain fart.

This is the way the minds work, always, every time, under all circumstances, all worldviews, all tunnels, all religions, all ideologies.  It cannot work any other way.  (if it’s healthy)

It this really that hard to understand?

Inside the skull

Perception Logic

The Reality Interface

Input – Dunno, Big Hoochie Koochie

Sensory input – narrow bandwidth

Right mind – perception, Little Hoochie Koochie, tensors,  wave nature, rotating vectors

Interface quantifies perception, minus imprinting constraints + triggers and transfers data to left mind

Left Mind – interpretation, MCX (array transform processor), discards a dimension and adds time, color, sound etc.  a subset of right mind

The output of this particular situation is a bird in color which people mistake for reality

synced with the logic level, (dendrite) and biased by the reticulum.

Rational/Logical Left/Right Minds

lets say, for instance, the pattern formed in the right mind was a lion, instead of a bird.  This would trigger the reflex action (primal defense mechanism, set by epigenetics ) and the reticulum would shoot the biasing through the roof the amygdala would kick in the left mind, which would shortcut the logic (dendrite) processor, and said potential prey would have a sudden uncontrollable urge to “be somewhere else”  within nanoseconds.  (how many ways do you need to prove a lion is dangerous?) “time to get out of Dodge”.  So what’s charlie chimp gonna do? Dunno yet, while he’s hauling ass his left mind is continuing to go over the left algorithm but we haven’t got there yet.  So he’s in the same position as the bacteria, there is no plan b yet.  We’re still in nano-second time window.

Logic

Nostalgia

ain’t what it used to be

“When you are courting a nice girl an hour seems like a second. When you sit on a red-hot cinder a second seems like an hour. That’s relativity” – Albert Einstein

Retro Physics

What I find interesting about this “new” toe is that it is recursive. IE in the sense that it is the same concept viewed from different perspectives. The Lisi theory is causing quite an uproar in the quantum physics field. Most criticism centers on math. BUT IT MUST BE REMEMBERED THAT THE MATH IS NOT THE PHYSICS. While this is way outside my field, it makes sense. If one sets aside the assumption made by Einstein that time is the 4th dimension, it all clicks into place. (Time may be an artifact of the mind used to make sense of motion) In any case, it can be tested. Lisi is at the least, not traveling the path most traveled. Don’t pass this up because you’re not interested in quantum physics. It speaks to the core of conceptualization. This is pertinent to understanding the mind. Check out the two links. The theory is identical. Plato called the unknown and unseen dimension “ethers” Lisi calls them Parallel universes. They are both right. This is the Theory Of Everything that Einstein was seeking. It explains the particle problem, the particle decay problem, the measurement problem and the two slot problem. “Most of the information here, from a technical aspect goes way over my head, however, I couldn’t help noticing an interesting geometric coincidence (maybe I am just attempting to create a connection where one does not exist). The two geometric representations on pages 19 and 20 are strikingly similar to that of “Metatron’s Cube” which is a figure containing all five platonic solids and has some religious connotation. From wiki “The simplest means of constructing Metatron’s Cube is to begin with a cube flattened along a space diagonal, such that it becomes a 2D figure, equivalent to a regular hexagon divided via its own diagonals into six equilateral triangles. The vertices of this 2D figure are then connected with additional lines. Several steps later, the full Metatron’s Cube figure is formed. This method requires dividing vertices according to the golden ratio. There is also a method of construction from the Flower of Life. The cube resembles the fourth dimensional analog of the cube, or the Tesseract.” Merkaba, also spelled Merkabah, is the divine light vehicle allegedly used by ascended masters to connect with and reach those in tune with the higher realms. “Mer” means Light. “Ka” means Spirit. “Ba” means Body. Mer-Ka-Ba means the spirit/body surrounded by counter-rotating fields of light, (wheels within wheels), spirals of energy as in DNA, which transports spirit/body from one dimension to another. The flower of life also shows the same relationships. and then there’s the Platonic Solids Kepler Plato’s dodecahedron Lisi’sdodecahedron Plato’sTOE PlatonicSolids4D 4DSphere Here is the Solid that Aristotle did not include in his regular solids. The missing dimension. Why? Because it was irrational. IE not subject to ratios. Aristotle changed the meaning of the word irrational to illogical, which remains to this day. (Aristotle was an idiot). In any case, Plato was mightily impressed by these five definite shapes that constitute the only perfectly symmetrical arrangements of a set of (non-planar) points in space, and late in life he expounded a complete “theory of everything” (in the treatise called Timaeus) based explicitly on these five solids. The fifth element, i.e., the quintessence, according to Plato was identified with the dodecahedron.

I consider the “Platonic solids” scenario to be a negentropic red herring with the concept of the sphere being one fading in and out of favor depending on the zeitgeist of the scientific thinkers. The concept is still popular among pseudo-thinkers. The mind, being a sub-set of the universe, is also negentropic. Because of this man continuously tries to make sense of the data perceived (Even if there is no sense there.) To the right is the solid Aristotle didn’t get, the sphere, it was irrational. (no straight lines) The platonic solids are an interesting data set and various thinkers have tried to make sense of them in a variety of contexts. (after all, that’s what the mind do, “a mind’s gotta do what a mind’s gotta do.”). I have not seen any relevant data that shows any relationship between the platonic solids and the universe (except for a relationship to each other). As much as I hate to quote Freud (I consider him an idiot) I do agree with him on two points.

• “maybe a cigar is just a cigar” IE maybe the image of a cigar in a dream is not a phallic symbol, but just a desire to smoke. Maybe the platonic solids are just what they appear, an interesting data set, with no relationship to anything besides each other.
• The second point, (which I mention only because I can now relegate him into the dust bin), is his observation that all women have a “penis envy”. (It is, after all, such a beautiful thing)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flower_of_Life http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7mIf5363e4&NR=1&feature=fvwp Education has crushed creativity. Robert Anton explains this very well in the below video. He speaks of tunneling and how the oriental and the occidental view life through tunnels which restrict our field of view. Our opinions say more about how the mind works than the world. It is worth pondering what he has to say about not only quantum physics but our view of the world. Robert Anton – Tunneling

Rubber Ruler

“Something unknown is doing we don’t know what.” – Sir Arthur Eddington Socrates often said that this inner voice, which many times deterred him from doing one thing, never incited him to do something else.

Well, Yeah, it’s basically a bullshit detector.

Consider Ptolemy; He used the epicycles of his planetary model to compute the dimensions of the universe. He estimated the Sun was at an average distance of 1210 Earth radii while the radius of the sphere of the fixed stars was 20,000 times the radius of the Earth.

It is in the nature of the mind to make sense of the universe. Even if there is no sense there. That is, after all, what differentiates us from animals. His calculations concerning the movement of the planets and stars were ingenious, they were elegant, they were practical, they were wrong. The math is not the physics. I don’t mean to cast asparagus on him, just to point out that he did not have the relevant data to tinker with. He was using a rubber ruler to measure the universe, stretching and twisting it until the observed data fit the theoretical data. The same is true of the dodecahedron envisioned by Plato and the modern day Lisi. These theories have beauty, but they are wrong. Conventional wisdom in physics builds on the concept of the space/time continuum as envisioned by Einstein. This has led to bizarre, convoluted theories of the universe, string theory (actually something there) parallel universes, big bang, dark matter etc. The word “probabilities” is a bullshit trigger. Like saying “half of all children in school are performing below level” and people will pontificate on the profundity of the concept. But you haven’t actually said anything. Until you can say “Is” in place of “Probabilities” it’s bullshit.

“Any measurement of the universe that does not take into account the mind is flawed because it is the instrument we use” – Robert Anton Wilson

My experience has shown me that conventional wisdom is ALWAYS wrong. (My bullshit detector goes off) Conventional wisdom only indicates that they are locked into a mental framework that precludes new concepts. They are stupid. And stupid is forever, you can’t fix stupid. Using this criteria, it can be seen that 99% of physical theories are bullshit. They are using a rubber ruler. Lisi is at least thinking outside the box.

Geoff Haselhurst> http://www.spaceandmotion.com/

Milo Wolff> http://www.quantummatter.com/

are unquestionably correct in their vision of the universe, and may have not only “The best answer to date” but “The best answer possible”, considering the indeterminate nature of the frequency domain.

As to visualizations, as the math is not the physics, the word is not the concept. I envision the “cosmic standing wave” as being vibrations, with a rotational component, a beat of 8 and negentropic. If you want an interpretation of reality, look out the window. If you want a perception, that’s hinky. I’ve put together a visualization called the “Big hoochie koochie”. Be sure to play the audio. Find it here> http://ellocogringo.wordpress.com/the-x-files/big-hoochie-koochie/.

As absurd as this is, I challenge ANYONE TO PROVE ME WRONG. And remember, I do not accept Calculus.

Copenhagen

Many physicists and philosophers have objected to the Copenhagen interpretation, both on the grounds that it is non-deterministic and that it includes an undefined measurement process that converts probability functions into non-probabilistic measurements. Einstein’s comments “I, at any rate, am convinced that He (God) does not throw dice.”[14] and “Do you really think the moon isn’t there if you aren’t looking at it?”[15] exemplify this. Bohr, in response, said “Einstein, don’t tell God what to do”.”

This is all inside the skull.  Reality is outside the skull,  What is so difficult to comprehend?

Einstein never accepted quantum mechanics as a “real” and complete theory, struggling to the end of his life for a theory that could better comply with causality, and protesting against the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics which says there exists no objective physical reality other than that which is revealed through measurement and observation.  It’s simple enough, Big Al, Reality is outside the skull.  Consider “Do you really think the moon isn’t there if you aren’t looking at it?” Of course it’s not.  As far as you’re concerned.  If you’re not looking at it, you can’t see it.  That is what all your experiments and theories are really telling you.  It’s all inside the skull.  You are doing calculus on interpretations of perceptions of reality.  You’re using a rubber ruler.

Secret-1 Secret-2

Contemplating contemplation

Secret-1 Secret-2

observing the observer

“Fundamental to contemporary Quantum Theory is the notion that there is no phenomenon until it is observed.”

You must ask the proper question if you expect a reasonable answer. The Aristotelean brain fart stinks up the cranium. We have two cognitive minds that project their observations onto the universe. (duality)  This problem is entirely inside the skull, the inability of the scientific method to consider B0ttom up thinking.

Let’s get down to the real nitty gritty.  We view the universe through tunnels which establishes end points. In this case, to put the above observation into more concrete terms. “is space making electrons or are electrons making space?” – Ted Lumley The brain farts limits the question to an either/or answer. Unconsidered is both or neither. So the answer to Mr. Ted is YES. In this case we are looking through the electron/space tunnel through which the space IS the accumulate of electrons. This seeming conundrum is the effect of this projection, not the cause. (People Think backwards)  Time is an artifact.

What is so complicated?  What has happened to the western mind that this seemingly obvious answer isn’t?  Why can no one see the blue sky?  You’re caught up the yin yang wars fighting the battle of MOOT hill.  This is simple shit, folks.  Use that dual core processor  between your ears for something other than keeping your ears apart.  Consider the following.  If you don’t get it, watch it again until you do.  The most profound experiment in the history of mankind and even the guy that did it doesn’t understand what he’s got.  THE BRAIN IS BASICALLY A SELF PROGRAMING AMORPHOUS MASS OF NEURONS!!!

Let’s get down to the real nitty gritty.

You’re just going over the programming code to try to determine the nature of the universe.

It’s all mental masturbation.  How can such a simple thing explode into a library of books at MIT?

Rat Brain Robot

Why do you complexify things?  It’s just mental masturbation.

TheLittleHoochieKoochie The BigHoochieKoochie

Holographic Mind

The holographic principle is a property of quantum gravity theories.

The analogy of a RAM is convenient but we are not dealing with an actual physical construct, as the sub-quantum realm exists outside of space-time. Think of the individual “storage space” as “whirlpools in the river”; It is able to access it’s “data” and “programs” strictly by virtue of it’s physical/energetic resonant signature Those familiar with signal routing through fiber-optic networks understand the concept of multiplexing, which builds a mental bridge for them to grasp this concept as applied to consciousness, which is matched to their “RAM”

A new scientific paradigm for studying mental processes, it is a hypothesis that could explain some of the classical paradoxes of brain function as well as some paranormal and transcendental experiences. The brain operates according to the same mathematical principles as a hologram. Memory is a result of biochemical changes in the brain and is stored in individual cells to be recalled when electrochemically activated. Traces of the same memory have been proven to exist in more than one area or part of the brain, or how memory comes to be distributed through the brain.

The process is the same as the mathematical transformation that occurs when a three-dimensional image is projected into space in holography. Initially, the notion of a neural hologram was only a metaphor. But now, Pribram believes there is sufficient laboratory evidence to demonstrate a physiological basis for the model.

Why was it that any given discrete memory would not be lost after brain injury? If a person has a stroke, and half his mind is destroyed, he doesn’t come home and recognize only half his family. It doesn’t work that way. Either memory is destroyed completely or nothing is lost. There’s no correspondence between how much tissue is damaged and how much memory is lost.

Just 2 percent of the fibers in a particular system would retain that system’s functions. There’s an amazing amount of redundancy in the brain. Imagine if 98 percent of your kidneys were gone, but the other 2 percent worked so well you couldn’t find anything wrong at all. The brains spare reserve for memory is fantastic.

Memory seems to be distributed throughout the brain, located in no particular part.

In the unANN HolographicMind